Assets include the Pali Hill residence and properties in Delhi, Noida, Ghaziabad, Mumbai, Pune, Thane, Hyderabad, Chennai, Kancheepuram and East Godavari.
FinTech BizNews Service
Mumbai, November 3, 2025: The Directorate of Enforcement (ED) has provisionally attached properties worth over Rs 3,083 Crore linked to the Reliance Anil Ambani Group, as per a press release issued by the ED today.
The attachment orders were issued on 31 October 2025 under Section 5(1) of the PMLA. The Directorate of Enforcement (ED) has provisionally attached 42 properties worth over Rs3,083 crore linked to various entities linked to the Reliance Anil Ambani Group. The orders were issued on 31 October 2025 under Section 5(1) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
The attached assets include the residence at Pali Hill, Bandra (West), Mumbai, the Reliance Centre at Maharaja Ranjeet Singh Road in New Delhi, and multiple assets across Delhi, Noida, Ghaziabad, Mumbai, Pune, Thane, Hyderabad, Chennai (including Kancheepuram) and East Godavari. These assets include office premises, residential units and land parcels. The aggregate attached value across the four orders is approximately Rs3,084 crore.
So far, ED has detected fraudulent diversion of public money by various Reliance Anil Ambani group companies including Reliance Communications Ltd, Reliance Home Finance Ltd (RHFL), Reliance Commercial Finance Ltd (RCFL), Reliance Infrastructure Ltd (RIL) & Reliance Power Ltd (RHFL). From around 2010-12 onwards, RCOM and its group companies raised thousands of crores from Indian banks, of which Rs19,694 crore still remains outstanding. These assets turned NPA, with five banks having declared RCOM’s loan accounts as fraud. ED investigation revealed that loans taken by one entity from one bank were utilized for repayment of loans taken by other entities from other banks, transfer to related parties, and investments in mutual funds, which was in contravention to the terms and conditions of the sanction letter of the loans. In particular, RCOM and its group companies diverted over Rs13,600 crore used in evergreening loans, over Rs12,600 crore was diverted to connected parties and over Rs1,800 crore was invested in FDs/MFs etc., which was substantially liquidated for rerouting to group entities. Huge misuse of bill discounting for the purpose of funnelling funds to connected parties has also been detected by ED. Certain loans were siphoned off outside India through foreign outward remittances.
During 2017–2019, Yes Bank invested Rs2,965 crore in RHFL instruments and Rs2,045 crore in RCFL instruments. By December 2019, these became non-performing investments. The outstanding was Rs1,353.50 crore for RHFL and Rs1,984 crore for RCFL. ED’s investigation in the case of RHFL and RCFL reveals that RHFL and RCFL received public funds of more than Rs10,000 crore. A large amount came from Yes Bank. Before Yes Bank invested this money in Reliance Anil Ambani group companies, Yes Bank had received huge funds from erstwhile Reliance Nippon Mutual Fund. As per SEBI regulations, Reliance Nippon Mutual Fund could not invest/divert funds directly in Anil Ambani group finance companies due to conflict-of-interest rules. Therefore, public money in mutual fund schemes was routed indirectly by them. The path ran through Yes Bank’s exposures. The public funds reached Anil Ambani group companies through circuitous route. The RHFL and RCFL borrowing was from more than 35 banks and financial institutions. Large parts of the loans were not repaid. A majority of these loans were diverted. The diversion was done by onward lending to group companies. The routing was through many shell entities effectively controlled by the Reliance Anil Ambani group. Public funds moved under the cover of corporate loans and inter-corporate deposits. Money passed from one company to another. Bank statements show very fast movement of funds. Very large amounts have been moved between accounts of different entities within minutes. Although RHFL is a housing finance company, its loan book shifted heavily to corporate loans. The National Housing Bank imposed a monetary penalty on RHFL for regulatory breaches. The company’s statutory auditors resigned. They flagged material uncertainty over the recoverability of corporate loans. A fraud report was also filed under Section 143(12) of the Companies Act. The subsequent auditor was penalised by the National Financial Reporting Authority for failing to perform key procedures. SEBI also took action against the company and certain officials.
Multiple intentional acts of mala fide have been detected by ED while advances loans to various companies, which ultimately were siphoned off. For genuine persons/businesses, loans involve due diligence- application, CIBIL, KYC, field visits, valuation, legal checks, and security creation, before sanction. ED has, in this case, instead detected a pattern of mala fide: pre-decided beneficiaries, manufactured paperwork, waived controls, and disbursals ahead of approvals, followed by swift routing to related entities. This conduct enabled siphoning of public funds. Some of such violations detected while analysing records related to loans extended by RHFL and RCFL include: Disbursal before sanction: Money was released before formal approval. Paperwork followed later. Chronology is impossible under prudent lending. It proves back-dating and pre-decided payouts. Examples: • Crest Logistics & Engineers Pvt. Ltd. — Rs7.00 crore disbursed 20-Apr-2018; sanction and agreement 26-Apr-2018. Six days early. • Species Commerce & Trade Pvt. Ltd. — Rs49.40 crore disbursed 21-Aug-2018; sanction 22-Aug-2018. • Worldcom Solutions Ltd. — Rs49.40 crore disbursed 21-Aug-2018; sanction 22- Aug-2018. • RPL Solar Power Pvt. Ltd. — Rs49.40 crore disbursed 21-Aug-2018; sanction 22-Aug-2018. • RPL Star Power Pvt. Ltd. — Rs49.40 crore disbursed 21-Aug-2018; sanction 22-Aug-2018. • RPL Sunlight Power Pvt. Ltd. — Rs99.95 crore disbursed 27-Mar-2018; sanction 28-Mar-2018.
Same-day Apply–Sanction–Agreement–Disbursal:
Large corporate loans were processed end-to-end in one day. This mala fide act leaves no time for Field Investigation, Personal Discussion, legal and technical checks, valuation, escrow setup, or security perfection. Examples: • RPL Aditya Power Pvt. Ltd. — Rs139.50 crore. Application, sanction, agreement and disbursal all 24-Aug-2018. • RCFL to Kunjbihari/Vihaan43 cluster — multiple files show same-day cycles with bulk disbursals. Sanction before Application: Approvals pre-date borrower documents. Chronology was engineered for window dressing of an earlier illegal disbursal. Example: • Kunjbihari Developers Pvt. Ltd. (later Vihaan43 Realty) — sanction 27-Dec2018; borrower board resolution and loan application 31-Dec-2018. Undated approvals: Credit Appraisal Memos are signed without dates by proposing, recommending and approving officials. The omission of dates has been done to hide the audit trail. This also enables illegal post-facto ratification. Loans not utilized for Intended Purpose: Sanction notes tie the loan to a specific project (for example, Pali Hill). Executed agreements say “general business purpose.” Security schedules are blank in the signed agreement. It lets funds be redirected while files claim compliance. Example: • Kunjbihari/Vihaan43 — sanction cites Pali Hill as security; agreement is generic; schedules blank.
Security misrepresentation and unsecured lending. Security schedules are empty. Charges are not registered with the Registrar of Companies. Valuation papers do not exist despite high security values being claimed in CAMs. This is a deceptive strategy and harms recovery. In several cases, only a residual charge on current assets is taken. Example: • Kunjbihari/Vihaan43 — no ROC charge; no valuation report; blank schedules. Blanket waivers granted to various companies while sanctioning loans: General Purpose Corporate Loan (GPCL) loan lending process broadly covers preparation of loan proposal, conducting thorough analysis of borrower as per company’s terms and conditions, preparation of Credit Appraisal Memos (CAMs) etc. Credit Appraisal Memo (CAM) is a standard format which documents all details of the loan proposal such as name of the proposer, name of the borrower, all financial details of the borrower, details of promoters/ director of borrower, details of loan amount including all its terms and conditions, findings of the credit appraisal team, details of any deviations proposed to be accepted from standard loan conditions etc. The said task was performed by Credit Appraisal Team” and analysis were put up before the “Credit Committee” in CAM for approval. However, many illegal and undue waivers were granted to various suspicious borrowers which ultimately contributed to loans being siphoned off. Some of such waivers include: Ø FI (Field Investigation) waived; Ø PD (Personal Discussion) waived. Ø Eligibility not as per norms; Ø Maximum loan not as per norms. Ø Disbursement to be done without creation of security.
Principal to be bullet (not monthly amortisation).
Ø ROI/ PF/ Foreclosure charges not as per norms.
Ø Customer rating not done; Builder/ Technical valuation not done.
Ø No escrow; no monthly booking MIS;
Ø Cash flow statement not to be taken. Weak, non-operational and shell borrowers. Borrowers show no employees, thin equity, negligible assets or nil revenue. For example, RPL Aditya Power Pvt. Ltd. had nil revenue and yet was sanctioned Rs139.50 crore. Related-party layering and circularity. Borrowers share addresses, directors and auditors with Anil Ambani group entities. Substantial loans move to CLE Pvt. Ltd. and then to Reliance Infrastructure Ltd. (RInfra). At least 13 borrowers routed over Rs1,460 crore to RInfra through CLE Pvt. Ltd. Further, borrower names were suggested by senior officers to the loan processing teams. Documents were then prepared.
ED also found complex shareholding in borrowing entities. The structures were designed to hide the ultimate beneficial owner. Directors had past or parallel links to Reliance group companies. Some borrowers were disclosed as related parties of the group. Just before sanction, the disclosures changed so that they no longer appeared as related parties. Many borrowers were registered at a few common premises. They had common directors and common auditors.
ED searches found no business operations at these addresses. The fund trail confirms pre-decided end-use. Loan funds moved from one account to another within minutes. The pattern shows layering and round-tripping. The accounting entries created a façade of genuine transactions. The purpose, however, was diversion of public money.
A separate search and seizure under FEMA in the case of Reliance Infrastructure Ltd. found Rs40 crore siphoned from the Jaipur–Reengus highway project. Funds moved through Surat-based shell companies to Dubai.
The trail has unearthed a wider international hawala network exceeding Rs600 crore.
ED continue to trace proceeds of crime. The recoveries by ED, after following due process of law are aimed at restoring losses to lenders and, ultimately, benefitting the general public.
